On Thursday, in a straw poll of studio execs, Deadline received three different answers in regard to Jurassic World‘s domestic opening: The predictions were $115M, $125M and $135M. The thought that Jurassic World would make $172M+ and push Universal Studios past $1B at the 2015 B.O. would have been a ballsy projection — $145M tops according to one distrib analyst.

And then Jurassic World‘s grosses swelled, hour by hour, day by day. By Friday late night, the Steven Spielberg-produced movie was ranking third on the all-time openers chart behind The Avengers ($207.4M) and its sequel Avengers: Age Of Ultron($191.3M). By Saturday, it was primed to beat Ultron, and as Sunday lingered it was clear the dinosaurs were set to tear off Avengers’ tights for the all-time record, called today at $208.8M.

An associate remarked to me this morning, “The projections were as reliable as the presidential ones on last night’s Veep finale.” So why were some B.O. forecasts off as much as $94M for Jurassic World? Get your box office nerd glasses on and we’ll explain.

‘Jurassic World isn’t a drop-off movie for the kids, but their parents want to see it too.’ — Uni distribution president Nicholas Carpou

Tracking typically wears the dunce caps in these off-kilter prediction scenarios. However, distrib chiefs sincerely swear NRG, Screen Engine and Marketcast’s systems aren’t broken, and as one forecasting insider asserts: “We’re not paid to predict box office, rather identify pockets of strength, threats and opportunities in the marketplace for the studio. … It’s a five-week journey with daily phone calls.”

When total awareness starts hitting the mid- to high-90th percentile range, and unaided awareness gets into the 40% range with first choice in the 30% realm — all of which were the case with Jurassic World — many studio distrib execs admit it becomes hard to predict just how far above $110M a film will climb in the course of its FSS. This might seem like a canned response, but mathematically it’s true per a B.O. market study guru: Once a film starts tracking beyond $110M, the tracking model breaks down. Why? Statistical tracking is based on previous cases and examples, the bulk of which exist in the middle of a data sample. Hence, when it comes to predicting a $15M-$50M opener; there’s a better chance for precision. There are a bulk of films to draw from in regard to comps. The higher echelon ($110M+) and lower end of the spectrum (less than $10M) are where it becomes challenging, with fewer B.O. scenarios to pull from. Only 24 films have grossed over $110M.

Heading into the weekend, comparisons were hard to find for Jurassic World. The best was Man Of Steel, which bowed during the same frame as Jurassic World two years ago and racked up $116.6M. Like Jurassic, it was a title being rebooted from a dormant, storied film franchise.

There were other holes in Jurassic World‘s tracking that contributed to its initial lowball estimates, and they’re the common industry gripes. For example, tracking doesn’t measure real-time response; most services poll three times a week and do so before the Thursday late-night shows. When the Friday tracking report comes out, it doesn’t reflect the vibe of the previous night’s sneaks, rather the audience’s interest during on early Thursday. Young kids under 12 aren’t part of the tracking samples, nor are families as a whole, and it was that group who showed up in droves for Jurassic World. Universal distribution president Nicholas Carpou told Deadline on Sunday, “Jurassic World isn’t a drop-off movie for the kids, but their parents want to see it too.” Given the multi-generational interest in Jurassic World, some believe that tracking’s inability to pulse kids and families hindered a better prediction on the grosses (that’s why it’s a challenge to put a finger on the opening of Disney family pics). Furthermore, millennials — the smartphone generation — are fickle. Between the time they are polled earlier in the week and the weekend, they can change their mind entirely in terms of attending the movies with their friends.

Also prompting lower pre-weekend estimates for Jurassic World was the fact that it was trailing Age Of Ultron ($191.3M) in unaided awareness (42% to 53%) as well as in men’s first choice: Ultron posted 54%-55%,while Jurassic Park was charting 39% in guys under 25 and 34% over 25. In hindsight, box office analysts sayUltron posted higher tracking figures since it was the kickoff film of the summer without any competitive titles in its way. Weighing down on Jurassic World’s tracking numbers were the other competitive films in the summer marketplace.

So as various execs and and analysts around Hollywood drew their own estimates, what truly happened with Jurassic World is that it became a beast unto itself. That’s when the film started over-indexing and beating everyone’s expectations. And the catalyst for the WOM heatwave can be pinned squarely to social media — which, unlike tracking, captured auds’ need-to-see vibe. Adds another Universal insider: “When you go into the weekend, you are armed with your expectations based on historical data, relying on movies released during the same time period as well as assessing different variables in the marketplace. But when the film gets a chance to be itself and grows through the weekend, you lose your historical data.”

A prime example of this scenario occurred with Ultron. It seemed as though the first Avengers would have served as the quintessential comp for Ultron — until the sequel smacked into the punching gloves of the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight during the first weekend of May. The lack of die-hard sporting events this weekend worked to Jurassic World‘s advantage: It was culturally the only event that Americans wanted to see. Sunday night’s Game 5 of the NBA Finals between the Golden State Warriors and Cleveland Cavaliers, despite its stellar 20.5M viewers, would have been more of threat if it was a New York/Boston vs. Los Angeles faceoff, per B.O. pundits. Ditto, for Saturday’s Stanley Cup Final battle between the Chicago Blackhawks and Tampa Bay Lightning — too regional to disrupt the Indominus Rex.

And as Uni execs watched hourlies rally for Jurassic World, word-of-mouth took off like a velociraptor barreling through the woods. According to social media monitor RelishMix, YouTube views for Jurassic World from its opening through Sunday were at 38M vs. Furious 7‘s 33M. The top Jurassic World spots were registering views on par with Furious 7 and the re-post rate for Jurassic vids on YouTube was 45 to 1 (the average is 9 to 1). The dinosaursclearly had fans in a trance. On Saturday alone, the Jurassic trailer pulled 1.4M YouTube views. The official trailer for Jurassic Park on Universal’s YouTube channel counts a total of 66.6M views, beating Furious 7’s 61.6M. Twitter hashtag #JurassicWorld peaked at 63K on Sunday after building for seven days; 3X higher than Furious 7. Heading into the weekend, Rentrak’s social media index PreAct clocked the WOM for Jurassic World at 98%, which not only means that the conversation for the film was very high on social media, but that it was positive too.

Says RelishMix’s lead social strategist Marc Karzen: “Surprise polling 500 or even 5,000 people about a film that they may or may not want to see doesn’t correlate to box office well. It’s a qualitative response of how much they want to see a movie (sequel) or if the marketing is memorable. But what’s more powerful is how thousands and millions of people share trailers with their community, or not, on multiple social channels. That shows intent (to buy a ticket) and if the movie exceeds expectation, as Jurassic World did, the Internet and box office explodes”.

And once the word was out on Jurassic World, it was all about keeping up with the Joneses.

Observed one studio box office analyst: “When a movie over-delivers and reaches that zeitgeist fever pitch, people feel like they can’t miss out. This even goes back to Twilight (opening $69.6M) and the first Hunger Games ($152.5M) — movies that over-delivered on tracking. With everyone more connected, there is a pack mentality among moviegoers more so than ever before.”

117 Comments

Or, folks were just plain stupid to buy a remake of the original movie, with Bryce Dallas Howard in the Sir Richard Attenborough role and Chris Pratt in the Sam Neill role. We f’d up. Sometimes we get it right (Avengers, Hunger Games, Avatar, Titanic, Dark Knight); this time, we failed to see past the hype.

Lip • on Jun 15, 2015 9:36 pm

Chris Pratt plays a security specialist working on raptor intelligence where as Sam Neil played a guy digging up dinosaurs for a living. In what world are they related other than both being men?

C • on Jun 16, 2015 9:28 am

He ends up saving the kids a la Sam Neil. He is the Dino-expert a la Neil. And I’d say BDH and the investor together represent the Attenborough character, albeit in a contrived and shallow manner.

Not saying Paul’s argument is completely intelligent, but this movie certainly tried to reiterate the original, instead of innovate.

Josh Jenkins • on Jun 16, 2015 3:41 pm

Except she saved the kids really, using an idea given to her by the youngest kid… he did his bit and fired some bullets near the end, but none of the ingenuity or major risk taking was done by him.

The character of Claire was distinctly similar to John Hammond from the original. We learnt however that Hammond never learned his lesson and carted more people off to an island for a second film. Claire learned the lesson that Alan Grant learnt in the original movie – to appreciate the people in your life as “assets” that are greater than your work.

It’s nothing groundbreaking or innovative, and the character was definitely inspired by others from the series’ past but I felt she was interesting enough to carry the movie.

Anonymous • on Jun 24, 2015 11:23 pm

Why reinvent the wheel?

gennaro • on Jun 15, 2015 10:10 pm

“Bryce Dallas Howard in the Sir Richard Attenborough role”… I take it you didn’t see the movie then.

seriously, if anything, she was the Sam Neil role of workaholic who can’t relate to children, until she has to save them.

Chris • on Jun 16, 2015 5:24 pm

Not to mention the tired “it copied the original, did nothing new!” drivel. The last 30-35 minutes alone laughs at that attempt at criticism.

Anyways, what a fun weekend it was to watch JW come out of nowhere and take the record. Each update on the numbers just built up the “can it do it!?” anticipation until by Sunday it seemed inevitable. So much fun, just like the movie itself.

Tim T. • on Jun 16, 2015 1:09 am

JEALOUS? The only failure here is your stupid comment.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 11:04 am

This wasnt a remake genius.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 12:47 pm

Hunger Games SUCKED!

:D • on Jun 16, 2015 8:00 pm

TAKE THAT BACK @ANONYMOUS!!! Hunger Games was amazing!!!!!!

brii • on Jul 7, 2015 4:23 pm

Hunger Games was really bad. An overrated movie.

Anonymous • on Jun 15, 2015 9:29 pm

I also think the extreme heat wave in the south and northeast helped a lot. People looking to get out….but stay cool.

Dave • on Jun 21, 2015 2:44 am

What ‘northeast’ do you live in? It was in the 70s in New York and 8ish in the cities of the northeast. People just enjoy seeing dinosaurs eat humans.

Dje • on Jun 15, 2015 9:34 pm

Paul you are totally wrong on those comparisons btw.

Re: the article. Jp3 also over performed. Not sure why studios always under expect from Jurassic but it’s a good thing actually because sometimes audiences like to discover a movie. But millennial a like this because they saw the first one in theaters most likely as kids and this has Chris Pratt in it. Also everyone loves dinosaurs. Also the box office has been stagnation last two weeks and people were itching to get back in the cinema for another event film with brad recombination. It also helped that ultron ended up being a let down.

MexyMartini • on Jun 15, 2015 9:35 pm

Why use the term “nerd,” as you did? Just because someone excels at what they do, it does not make them a “nerd” or “geek.” I am sick of the Internet wallowing in those terms. You’re giving these nerd/geeks far too much credibility.

Bill blankenship • on Jun 16, 2015 1:09 am

it’s simply a term for being overly excited with the specific minutiae of a subject.

it’s not derogatory or in anyway indicative of an overall personality. most intelligent people are “a nerd” or “geek out” over at least one subject.

Just curious how much of these “surprise” hits have to do with timing.

If taking a poll off a list then Jurrasic World or Fast 6 wouldn’t necessarily be at the top of most people’s list. But because Fast6 was first out of the gate and with no big movie for 3 more weeks then it kept picking up Box Office beyond what it may have deserved.

The same will be true for Jurassic World which is arguably the last of the summer blockbusters. I fully expect JW to plow right through the next few weeks because there simply isn’t another four quadrant film until… Um… Ant Man? Fantastic Four?

So, while great movies are sometimes predictably on top, sometimes timing is an intangible where there just isn’t anything else to watch. (It sure helped Avatar and Transformers.)

4 Quad Film • on Jun 16, 2015 2:04 pm

I can’t believe how surprised I am to discover you’re not 100% wrong. After reading your comment and thinking: “There’s no way that can be correct” I’m shocked to discover that there aren’t a lot of 4 quads left.

Nope, a Reboot would be if they completely ignored everything that came before it. Jurassic World built upon it, they even showcase that in the movie itself. It’s a direct sequel to Jurassic Park.

They intentionally ignored Lost World and Jurassic Park 3.

blkyank • on Jun 20, 2015 1:29 am

Well in a way,they didn’t ignore The Lost World.

It was in that film that InGen and unethical dealings by some of its management,first became part of the storyline.

I also believe that the easter egg showing of Ian Malcolm’s
novel in Jurassic World was the book he was mentioned as writing in The Lost World. That novel was mentioned again in Jurassic Park III.

The only real reason those films were mostly ignored
by Jurassic World was that they were not really about Dinosaurs breaking loose in an amusement park.

They were about characters going to another island where the animals were already loose.

Dave • on Jun 21, 2015 2:31 am

They ignored the second and third movies because if there was a second island that the dinosaurs were bred and raised on then why would they have the I-Rex on the same island as the park?

wonk • on Jun 15, 2015 11:46 pm

Huh. Situations maybe – and, duh, dinosaurs – but there’s only one, relatively minor and perfectly logical character from the first film.

Paul • on Jun 16, 2015 8:03 pm

reboot means ignoring everything or starting from scratch — see amazing spiderman or man of steel.

coolrepublica • on Jun 15, 2015 10:00 pm

Let’s not beat around the bush. Chris Pratt SOLD this movie. People like to say a movie about Dinosaurs and a franchise is a sure thing. Bull. The last Jurassic Park movie barely anyone remembers it, and didn’t make that much money. It is not about the dinosaurs or the effect. People have to want to pay to watch something and Chris Pratt work his little heart out during promotion of this movie. He should get some kind of bonus just for doing promotion right. America and the world were dying for an actor to say “shut up and take my money” to and they found it in Chris Pratt. It was years of pent up demand that just busted the damn.

If you read about Chris Pratt in comment section on the internet, his likability factor is out of this world. Women want to have this babies. Men want to be gay for him. Children want him to adopt them. I can’t remember the last time an actor had such a following. Not even Vans Diesel can beat his love index.

Hollywood hasn’t made a megastar in ages. Leonardo and Brad Pitt are the last two major Mega Stars I can remember and they were products of the 90’s. Getting people to love your character is easy. Getting people to love the actor is gift that keeps on giving. Chris Pratt has arrived. Congrats to him.

And I hope Chris uses his newfound box-office influence to help get his talented wife Anna Faris the big film hit she deserves.

NHBill • on Jun 16, 2015 4:26 am

She’s right where she belongs in a hit sit-com.

Really? • on Jun 17, 2015 8:57 am

Umm I guess you guys have forgot about Scary Movie?

Richard • on Jun 15, 2015 10:25 pm

Vans Diesel? Really?

coolrepublica • on Jun 16, 2015 12:24 am

People like him. They don’t chris Pratt love him, but they like him.

No • on Jun 15, 2015 10:36 pm

Are you insane? People went for two reasons: Dinosaurs, and brand recognition. Most people have no clue who Pratt is. Wow.

Coolrepublica • on Jun 16, 2015 12:20 am

People knew who is was by the time he was done promoting this movie. He did a phenomenal job. a+ work. If they gave oscars for promotion, he would win. He sold this movie.

People like to pretend that people will see anything that has brand recognition. The last Jurasic movie had dinosaurs and brand name. What went wrong? The last couple Spider-Man movies had brand recognition and special effect? What went wrong?

I never heard of Chris Pratt in my life before I watched the Lego movie. I sat there and after it was over the only thing I could think of was ” who is the voice that played emmet? This guy is really good.” And when the GOTG came out I went to see it, I had that moment when i knew a star was born. Not just a guy in a big action movie that no one knows his name and no one cares to find out *cough guy in superman* Something about Chris Pratt is very old Hollywood. and no actors I can think of that have come out in the past 10 years plus years even comes close. Chris hemsworth? NO. Chris Evans? NO. Benedict cumberbatch? NO NO.

Chris Pratt got people into those seats, not just dinosaurs. He is the Taylor swift of movie actors. Loved by most and hated by almost no one.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 1:06 pm

The year gap and a new generation …is + for jw

Anonymous • on Jul 11, 2015 10:44 pm

This lol…I went to see it and most people there weren’t even born yet when I went to see the original

Aw, Chris Evans has something special…perfect for Captain America, maybe translatable to other characters. He wasn’t the worst part of Snowpuncher or whatever that awful movie was called…the other guy to keep an eye on is Oscar Isaac. He has insane screen chemistry and that multicultural appeal that helps Vin Dielsel and Dwayne Johnson.

Hemsworth is a one-trick pony and Cumberbund’s too homely to be a big budget movie lead.

No, Pratt’s definitely a draw. I’ve got a 9-year-old daughter, and she’s pretty meh to dinosaurs, but she saw Pratt, knew that she liked the guy from Guardians of the Galaxy, and that was enough for her to give it a shot. (Clearly, the goings-on in my house are a window into the soul of the box office.)

I am so in love w/ Chris Pratt. If I met a guy that had half the personality Chris Pratt had, I would love him foreverrrrrrrr. Anna is so so lucky.

Andrew wald • on Jun 15, 2015 10:14 pm

The first JP was a classic and univ smartly went back to crichtons story structure from his book and screenplay plus Steven Speilbergs touch to create compelling filmmaking
And we still love Dino’s and “nothing can go wrong ” crichtons hallmark basic theme…kudos to all filmmakers involved….
Add some classic John Williams and kids in peril plus 3D and records fall everyone loves to see a good movie…well done, and the audience says what’s next that was satisfying…..andrew wald PGA

one of the few genuinely insightful comments on this thread, IMO — espy the part about Crichton’s defining theme(s). And, no, I don’t know Andrew Wald. I don’t know who he is, and I don’t need to. Sometimes a smart comment is just a smart comment.

Andrew wald • on Jun 17, 2015 9:19 pm

Thank you. Andrew Wald

90sChick • on Jun 15, 2015 10:21 pm

I bought my tickets a month in advance, knowing they would sell out. If you didn’t see a HUGE opening weekend for this movie, then you definitely didn’t grow up in the nineties…meganostalgia + Chris Pratt’s inherent lovability made this a sure thing in my eyes…Trevorrow is no Spielberg, and poor Bryce Dallas Howard’s character was the worst/most sexist I can remember in the history of modern filmmaking, but it didn’t matter. The theme song alone left me misty-eyed, and I know many felt the same.

aim44 • on Jun 16, 2015 1:33 am

I agree 100% 90’sChick! Everyone is reading into the wrong things here. As a millennial that grew up on Jurassic Park I will say confidently none of you have a clue. Jurassic Park is the Star Wars of my Generation. People a little older than I (I am just 22 years old) took their young kids to see it because they were in love with the film during their childhood. This blew up because Millennials aren’t actually that fickle as this article would have you believe. We grew up with the first two films. My friends and I have seen this film multiple times because it brought our age group, one that is moving on into adulthood, a sense of nostalgia for our childhood. I will actually be shocked if this does not break past 1.8 billion globally. Jurassic Park is HUGE with people under 35. And it appeals to young families and kids alike. Metrics are silly; it’s very obvious this was going to happen.

aim44 • on Jun 16, 2015 1:56 am

I’ve also probably watched the original JP film more than a hundred times in my life because I’m a nerd. I loved this movie! Colin Trevorrow was a huge fan of Jurassic Park, and it shows. The final half hour of this film should satisfy any Jurassic Park fan! I actually disagree with you when it comes to Claire. I though she was the strongest female character in the JP franchise (SPOILER: despite the high heels shes the only female other than a dinosaur to save the day in a film) seriously if we actually compare Bryce Dallas Howard’s character arc to anyone else, its essentially Alan Grant’s from the first film. Bryce Dallas Howard chose to wear the heels, and in a way it shows women can retain femininity and still kick ass! Her character was a little cliched but she didn’t bow down to anyone!

B- • on Jun 18, 2015 12:19 pm

She indeed had the most developed character. Also, people keep missing that her wardrobe and styling was to mimic the “damsel in distress” look of Fay Wray in “King Kong”. She was uptight but grew as the movie went on.

And when she saved Chris Pratt’s character the first time, he kisses her first, turning the cliche upside down.

These sexism claims are just funny to me. Movies are supposed to be grounded in reality. And despite the world becoming increasingly PC, sexism still exists. So the way it was depicted in Jurassic World was realistic. As opposed to Black Widow claiming she’s a monster because she is incapable of having children. That was sexist.

BDH wore heels the whole time and didn’t need to have them cut off Romancing The Stone style. She was the true hero of the movie while Pratt was the eye candy.

WMX • on Jun 16, 2015 2:45 am

Most sexist character? Yep, you truly are a 90s girl. Watch more movies.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 3:31 am

Spot on! Couldn’t have put it better.

longtime observer • on Jun 15, 2015 10:59 pm

Amazing analysis. Learned a lot. Thanks.

Anon • on Jun 15, 2015 11:19 pm

Could just me but I have a feeling Star Wars the force awakes going to break this Jurasic Worlds new record in December when it is released?

DE • on Jun 16, 2015 2:43 am

Not a chance. But then again Avatar 2 will.

NotAChance? • on Jun 16, 2015 2:16 pm

I don’t know…The hype is going to be monstrous. Grandparents will take their grandchildren to see TFA. And with Ford back as Solo? SWTFA might very well be like nothing we’ve ever seen before.

I remember years back when one of the first three (1-3) opened and people were actually sleeping out in front of theaters to buy tickets. If they slept out for one of those movies TFA will probably be a circus.

MMM, I think Star Wars will break JW’s record and then Avatar 2 will break Star Wars’ record and on and on. It’s just an endless cycle of franchises beating franchises until movie theaters are turned into virtual reality parlors that have more in common with video games than narrative storytelling.

NotAChance? • on Jun 16, 2015 7:26 pm

There’s no way AVATAR 2 is going to do the numbers AVATAR did. That was a hype movie people went to and walked away saying…”What?” (It worked…Good for them!)

But I don’t think AVATAR 2 is going to do the numbers STAR WARS TFA will. Assuming that there’ll be the death of an original character I think TFA is going to be like nothing we’ve ever seen before b.o.-wise.

Are you kidding me!?! The new Star Wars will be the highest grossing film of all time. It will OPEN at $225 million domestic.

daglaws • on Jun 15, 2015 11:36 pm

Does it really matter that the predictions were wrong? How does that affect future movies?

Anonymous • on Jun 15, 2015 11:37 pm

I think people want old school family adventures – but not retarded shit fests like those journey movies with the rock. Movies like Gunga din, King Kong, raiders of the lost ark…

Roque • on Jun 16, 2015 12:27 am

Unfortunate that studios seem to think that machines and statistics will tell them the future all the time. I knew JW would be huge for two reasons: families and Pratt.

1) Jurassic Park came out in 1993, 22 years ago. Teens who blew up that box office back then, today they have children who are around the same age as the parents in ’93. Many of those children were introduced to the Jurassic Park franchise at impressionable ages on home video and it has become a lovemark for them. This is the first truly major release in the franchise in a long time (14 years since JP3). Hence, MANY families, young adults, and kids will be rushing out in droves to see JW in all it’s big screen glory. Truly the definition of an event film, more so than any of the Marvel films. It has nothing to do with sports or the weather. Families and youths were going to make plans to see it.

2) Chris Pratt, since Guardians, is a huge ball of likable, no-holds-barred star-power right now. He is the picture of a good time at the movies and safe in the eyes of most film-going parents, much like Ford and Hanks were (when they appeared in 4 quad or otherwise PG or PG-13 fare).

I calculated this as a human being, using the natural gifts of logic and reasoning. No overpriced software or listening to droning bean-counters. I just thought. I would’ve bet on it, had I known it was even a big deal. The studios don’t realize how they could be making so much more money if they just paused and thought about things for a minute.

Plus, Pratt seems to want to do these “event” type movies. He doesn’t spout nonsense about his craft, or the artistic endeavor, or whatever. He makes fun movies, doesn’t take himself too seriously, and is on that perfect level of good looks where women are very attracted to him, but men don’t hate him (lots of straight guys do not buy beautiful men as leading actors). He isn’t perfect looking, but he has a perfect level of good looks.

Michael Z Lewis • on Jun 16, 2015 12:44 am

This film is just around 2 hours long, resulting in increased 2D, 3D, and IMAX showings per theatre.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 3:45 am

As much as everyone in Hollywood loves to chew on a story like this, can we please wait to see the second week drop before polishing our laurels?

Ed • on Jun 16, 2015 12:30 pm

Unlikely. Just talked to a friend who tried to go see JW on Monday night and it was still sold out except for the first row. Another friend who saw it already wants to go back and see it a few more times. So between repeat customers and those who decided to wait for the opening weekend crowd to thin out, JW should still do really good business on its 2nd weekend.

B- • on Jun 18, 2015 12:24 pm

Meanwhile it made 25 million on Monday and 24 million on Tuesday… But sure, lets wait for the second weekend…

NHBill • on Jun 16, 2015 4:24 am

Simple.
Pratt becoming a super-uber-mega-star on the strength of Guardians was not factored in.

RAGGEDT • on Jun 16, 2015 2:59 pm

THIS. What was the last movie that completely overperformed predictions and tracking? Guardians of the Galaxy. The explanation then was, “Well, Marvel has a formula; people who were Avengers nerds knew about it.” Well, now that Jurassic World has opened to such huge numbers, maybe the best thing to do is just simply compare what those two movies have in common, eh?

Greg • on Jun 16, 2015 4:39 am

The New (Same Old) Hollywood Business Model: Assuming YOUR movie has a chance of coming out of nowhere and making $200 million opening weekend.

Anonymous • on Jun 16, 2015 5:40 am

Chris Pratt definitely had a hand in JW’s hug weekend. You’re a fool if you think otherwise.

Nathan Night • on Jun 16, 2015 5:29 am

Easy: no super heros. People are tired of blockbusters featuring men in tights. “Age of Ultron” was the epitome of predictability, just so tired, useless and dull.

A film starring dinosaurs hasn’t been seen in many years.

People want excitement. New excitement.

Nothing Shocking • on Jun 16, 2015 5:42 am

There hasn’t been much to fawn over at the theater thus far, I guess folks are resigned to seeing to anything… but please stop saying Chris Pratt had anything to do with this flix success — you’re embarassing yourself.

w.j. • on Jun 16, 2015 6:13 am

Chris Pratt absolutely has something to do with the film’s success. I really had very little desire to see Jurassic World (the previews didn’t make me believe it would be much different than Jurrassic Park 3) outside of the fact that Chris Pratt was in it. I thought he was great in Guardians of the Galaxy, and he was really the only reason I was going to see it, and I am far from being alone.

Just maybe studios will start thinking of something besides super this or super that . I just hope the studios also realize people were paying to see the dinosaurs and not Pratt . Anyone could have played that part .

L • on Jun 16, 2015 9:19 am

Well, it seems that people are arguing over whether Chris Pratt had anything to do with the success of the movie or if it was all the dinosaurs… I think it’s mostly the dinosaurs but Pratt probably has something to do with it as well. I know he was a factor in my decision to see it opening weekend… He definitely has some visibility due to the success of Guardians of the Galaxy.

I’ll use my family as an example. My father recognized Pratt easily from both GOTG and Parks and Rec. My mom knew him from Parks and Rec. My brothers, from Guardians. We all wanted to see him, along with the dinosaurs… Which were obviously the main draw. But still, that’s 4 quadrant recognition of the star. Guardians did wonders for Pratt’s recognition.

I think it’s both silly to say that Pratt had everything to do with the movie’s success and also nothing to do with the movie’s success. The reality lies somewhere in the middle.

Skeeter • on Jun 16, 2015 9:25 am

Jurassic World sequel. Ingen’s plan this whole time was to defeat the avengers and Dr. Wu finally creates a Velociraptor army that take them all out then the raptors join the police/military and stop terrorists, killers, rapists etc